A sub who could give a root

The Glass House spotted this charming heading (above) in Wednesday’s Daily Torygraph on a little yarn about the number of conquests by randy Juan Carlos, the former king of Spain and the alleged need for him to be dosed with drugs to curb his libido.

It appears that this lothario didn’t just have juan conquest; more than 5000 ladies were given a right royal rogering.

But The Glass House dips its lid to the Sydney paper’s sub-editor who is obviously a HG and Roy fan. Rooting king indeed.

But perhaps not a heading you’d expect to see in a quality compact such as the Daily Shitigraph.

Readers in other markets are apparently far more sensitive.

In Brisbane The Courier-Mail ran a fairly bland heading (below) as did the Herald-Sun in Melbourne (further below).

It appears that Sydneysiders are far more, shall we say, earthy in their tastes and tolerances.

Or maybe whoever was subbing that edition of the Tele, if anyone was subbing, simply couldn’t give a root.

***

An unbalanced budget coverage

Wednesday’s Daily Torygraph in Sydney devoted four early news pages to the NSW Government’s Budget brought down by the Treasurer with the unpronounceable surname the day before.

The pages were chockers with straight news reports and commentary pieces on the great document and the NSW government’s plans for moving forward, as Julia Gillard was wont to say.

And the amount of space made available to the state Opposition to critique the economic plan for a COVID-19 recovery in the years ahead?

Surely a panel down the side of one of those four pages?

Nope. Zilzh, zero, nada, nought. NOTHING!

How’s that for an unbalanced report from the House of Rupe?

The Sydney Morning Herald‘s Budget coverage was slightly more professional with comments from Labor spokespeople at the end of most of the articles.

A bit of a shame, then, that the paper’s page-one lead declared it was continued on page four. It was page five.

***

Rupert embraces Trump tactic

Just last week our Media Glass House teams brought you a story that exploded the myth that News Corp Australia outlets had boycotted coverage of former PM Kevin Rudd’s petition to Federal Parliament seeking a royal commission into the company’s activities and editorial practices.

We revealed that the story had indeed been covered by one of the many, many outlets in the News Corp empire – one of its late night, scarcely viewed, right-wing, “after dark” chat shows. Or should that be echo chambers?

Yes, the Rudd petition was canvassed by one of the numerous vehicles for confirming right-wing prejudices in a panel discussion that rapidly dismissed all of Mr Rudd’s concerns.

But wait, what’s viewed as perhaps the flagship of the Murdoch media empire Down Under, The Australian, has this week itself run a story on the Rudd petition.

But what line did it take?

Obviously the one that denigrated Rudd and his petition and cast doubt over its authenticity.

It struck gold by allegedly uncovering 1000 fake signatories who were, The Oz tells us, nothing but computer “robots” able to be deployed from offshore to boost the petition’s total number of signatories.

Yes, it’s a new story that a petition of that nature may have been compromised in such a way.

But we work out that even if there are 1000 fake signatories, that’s 0.2% of the total of more than 500,000 who put their real names to it.

The totally transparent aim of The Oz’s story is to sow seeds of doubt in readers’ minds and to ensure they can refer to the “compromised” or “hacked” petition whenever they run a story on it in the future, thereby attempting to erode its legitimacy.

We can’t help but compare such a tactic to those employed by defeated US President Donald Trump who has been jumping up and down about allegedly illegal votes without acknowledging that if there were any “illegal” ballots, then their number is minuscule compared with the overwhelming numbers who voted for his opponent.

The Oz story may make sycophantic pro-Rupert News Corp identities feel good, but it doesn’t change the legitimacy of the Rudd petition.